On 23 Sep 2003, at 2:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Either I have to have a "per client" ../distfiles directory on the nfs
server wich creates an enormous redundancy...
Or, I share the single ../distfiles directory between all 13 computers,
with all potential concurrency problems that would bring in to the soup.
Could you explain what concurrency issues you anticipate, please..?
I think that in this situation it's advisable to ensure that no two machines `emerge sync` at the same time, but that is easily controlled. One might also need to `emerge -fu world` on one machine before actually `emerge -u`ing all other machines, however this is again fairly trivial. Both could be managed by a midnight cron job, for instance.
Marius's emerge wrapper is constructive. I just can't understand why it
would be so difficult to create a flag for this in make.conf. The default
value would typically be to keep the distfiles.
This was discussed on -dev last month, without a massive consensus. http://tinyurl.com/octt
A script is, however, given that (with some discretion, I think) deletes files in this directory as you require; this script could of course also be cron'd. Clearly the important factor is that a script which removes files from .../distfiles/ should not facilitate a user placing anything more than insignificant additional load on the volunteer mirrors & file-servers who give their bandwidth to Gentoo & the OSS community.
I think that the reason no huge consensus was reached regarding this on -dev when it was last discussed is that it's not sufficiently interesting or useful enough to anyone involved that they might wish to incorporate it into Portage (which is, by all accounts, a large & complicated piece of code as it is). Feel free to supply a patch.
As Daniel recently said at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/12236/ , "The goal of
Gentoo is to design tools and systems that allow a user to do their work
pleasantly and efficiently as possible, as *they* see fit."
And also "If the tool forces the user to do things a particular way, then
the tool is working against, rather than for, the user."
Please excuse my skepticism: I do not wish to critisise our beloved leader, however this statement rang out of true for me when he originally posted it.
Surely the goal of ANY distro or operating system is "to design tools and systems that allow a user to do their work pleasantly and efficiently as possible, as they see fit"..? Surely ANY o/s or distro should aspire to such perfection in all matters..?
However this world is one of compromises, and it is difficult enough to describe eloquently enough one's idea of "pleasant and efficient" in English, let alone in code. Now implement your code such that it is powerful & flexible enough to do things ANY way that ANY user requires, and I think you will be coding until Judgment Day. I think that the consequence of each & every distro aspiring to such perfection is that each takes different approaches & hence different compromises, suitable for different types of user.
Gentoo never forces you to do anything a particular way, because you have access to the source-code, and you can change that. By default, I think, Gentoo is most suitable for users who have a particular design & engineering 'philosophy'; it provides "tools and systems that allow" such a user "to do their work pleasantly and efficiently as possible, as *they* see fit."
I think that such a user would decide that it is easy enough to implement what you require with the tools resources you have been advised of in this thread, rather than trying to reimplement it themselves in any other way
Stroller.
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
